Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
. the man driving the car is gregg bergersen. he's a civilian analyst at the pentagon with one of the nation's highest security clearances. his companion is tai shen kuo, a spy for the people's republic of china. bergersen knew a secret that the chinese desperately wanted to know, and neither man knows that what they're about to do is being recorded by two cameras the fbi has concealed in their car. >> let you have the money. >> oh, oh. are you sure that that's okay? >> yeah, it's fine. >> welcome to 60 minutes on cnbc. i'm bob simon. in this edition, we turn our attention to some foreign intrigue. first, a story about a mysterious computer virus that struck an iranian nuclear plant. later, the report of how american agents hunted a notorious arms dealer. and finally, an account of a chinese-american spy trying to steal u.s. military secrets for china. we begin with the story of stuxnet, a computer virus considered to be the world's first destructive cyberweapon. it was launched several years ago against an iranian nuclear facility, almost certainly with some u.s. involvement. but as steve k
the pentagon's budget and still protect national security. former defense undersecretary michelle flournoy, if identify got that right -- michelle flournoy, i beg your pardon, she penned an op-ed in the wall street journal this week. joining us is aforementioned michele flournoy. michelle, or undersecretary, which ever you prefer -- >> michelle, please. >> i thought your piece was terrific. sequester or not, defense department is going to lose 10% of its budget and you think there are good ways to do it. walk us through some of the key points. >> i do think the defense budget will come under pressure, even if we do get a deal. there are ways to reduce costs go after the defense enterprise rather than balance the budget on the back of the force. first cutting unnecessary overhead. the pentagon and d.o.d. has grown by more than 100,000 civilians in the last decade. we can pare those back now that we're coming out of a period of war. >> i thought your civilian argument was great. we've been through these wars and you're saying you can take it right back down without losing any national securi
'd say that. >> and we found that the pentagon is saying it too. the defense advanced research projects agency, known as darpa, did its own analysis, and we obtained this internal memo that concludes there is: do you feel vindicated after all these years? >> i don't have any real need for vindication. i know what i've seen. >> that was a pretty big smile on your face, though. >> it is good. it's not bad. certainly, it's good. >> the pentagon is funding more experiments at the naval research lab in washington, d.c., and at mckubre's lab in california. we wondered what richard garwin would think of the defense department's appraisal. "the experiments leave no doubt that anomalous excess heat is produced." >> well, that's a statement. >> you just don't buy that. >> well, i am living proof that there's doubt. now, they can say that excess heat is being produced, but they can't say there's no doubt. all they can say is, they don't doubt, but i doubt. >> if you asked me, "is this gonna have any impact on our energy policy?" it's impossible to say, because we don't fundamentally understand the
if, larry, you get rid of all the waste and abuse that they say is in the pentagon, you're still not going to make a dent in the spending that we need to to bring our budgets back under control. the fact of the matter is president obama not only suggested but he insisted that this sequester become law. you now have democrats running away -- >> it was his idea. and we just clarified that. it was his idea in the first place. why is he trying to worm out of his idea? >> not only the president but the entire democratic party has this righteous indignation over sequester when in fact they were the ones pushing it in the first place. the house has twice passed bills that would bring reasonable spending cuts into law. the senate thus far, we have seen a complete vacuum of leadership. it's time, frankly, for everyone to come to the table and have a reasonable discussion about what meaningful spending cuts would actually take to pass into law. >> catherine, i just want to get your quick take as the libertarian in the group. we've got a little something for everybody here tonight. before i
recently well. today we do have news from lockheed martin, the pentagon's biggest contractor suggesting that actually sales this year will drop by more if the automatic spending cuts kick in and future years will also be materially affected. what is your view on the sector? >> well, right now, there's just a lot of fear but there has been for some time. so there might be a certain degree of recovery, realizing that it is bad but not the apocolypse that some people have painted it as and there is a good chance that some damage might be undone in that interim period. so while we don't like living in uncertainty and while there will be paying under almost any scenario, it certainly doesn't mean the end. there are definitely positives for this industry in the sector. >> which is the greatest threats. automatic spending can cuts or the fact that you have a president who is in his second term and therefore perhaps more able to cut spending programs that might hit particular cities or regions and a new defense secretary. >> you know, it is interesting. of course a lot of that is simply by even
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)